Skip to content
Open
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
1 change: 1 addition & 0 deletions .github/CODEOWNERS
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -712,6 +712,7 @@ peps/pep-0833.rst @dstufft
peps/pep-0835.rst @ilevkivskyi
peps/pep-0836.rst @savannahostrowski @Fidget-Spinner @brandtbucher
peps/pep-0840.rst @jeremyhylton @gvanrossum
peps/pep-0841.rst @corona10 @sobolevn
# ...
peps/pep-2026.rst @hugovk
# ...
Expand Down
314 changes: 314 additions & 0 deletions peps/pep-0841.rst
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,314 @@
PEP: 841
Title: Adding Frozen Syntax to Make Immutable Types Optimizable

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Perhaps?

Suggested change
Title: Adding Frozen Syntax to Make Immutable Types Optimizable
Title: Adding Frozen Syntax to Optimize Immutable Types

Or:

Suggested change
Title: Adding Frozen Syntax to Make Immutable Types Optimizable
Title: Frozen Syntax to Optimize Immutable Types

Sentence case versions:

Suggested change
Title: Adding Frozen Syntax to Make Immutable Types Optimizable
Title: Adding frozen syntax to optimize immutable types

Or:

Suggested change
Title: Adding Frozen Syntax to Make Immutable Types Optimizable
Title: Frozen syntax to optimize immutable types

Author: Donghee Na <donghee.na@python.org>,
Nikita Sobolev <mail@sobolevn.me>
Discussions-To: https://discuss.python.org/t/pep-841-adding-frozen-syntax-to-make-immutable-types-optimizable/108219
Status: Draft
Type: Standards Track
Created: 16-Jul-2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Day the PEP number was assigned:

Suggested change
Created: 16-Jul-2026
Created: 20-Jul-2026

Python-Version: 3.16
Post-History: `17-Jul-2026 <https://discuss.python.org/t/pep-841-adding-frozen-syntax-to-make-immutable-types-optimizable/108219>`__

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
Post-History: `17-Jul-2026 <https://discuss.python.org/t/pep-841-adding-frozen-syntax-to-make-immutable-types-optimizable/108219>`__
Post-History: `20-Jul-2026 <https://discuss.python.org/t/pep-841-adding-frozen-syntax-to-make-immutable-types-optimizable/108219>`__



Abstract
========

This PEP proposes *frozen display* syntax: ``f{1, 2, 3}`` evaluates to a
:class:`frozenset`, and ``f{'a': 1}`` evaluates to a ``frozendict``.
Because immutability is guaranteed by the syntax itself rather than
inferred from usage, the compiler can treat frozen displays as first-class
citizens of its optimization pipeline: constant displays are folded into a
single ``LOAD_CONST`` with an exact result type at compile time and
cached in ``.pyc`` files.


Motivation
==========

Python has display syntax for its mutable containers but none for its
immutable ones. Today an immutable set must be written as
``frozenset({1, 2, 3})`` and an immutable mapping as
``frozendict({'a': 1})``. Each of these:

* builds a mutable set or dict, then copies it into the immutable type.
* looks up the name ``frozenset`` or ``frozendict`` at runtime on every
execution.
* cannot be easily optimized by the compiler, because either name may be
rebound and the call may have arbitrary side effects, or
value can be of unexpected type for the optimization,
value can be non uniquely referenced.

CPython already hints at the opportunity: the peephole optimizer rewrites
a constant set display into a frozenset, but only as the right operand
of ``in``. Assign the same display to a variable and the optimization is
gone. The root cause is that the compiler can never prove immutability
of a ``set`` or ``dict`` display, so it must rebuild it on every
execution. A display whose *semantics* guarantee immutability removes
that barrier once and for all.

One of the goals of this PEP is to increase the use of immutable containers
in CPython, preparing for a concurrent future in which free-threading and
subinterpreters become significantly more common.
Efficient creation of immutable data structures and convenient syntax would
encourage the use of ``frozendict`` and ``frozenset``. This would reduce bugs
caused by accidental mutation of shared mutable containers while also
improving performance. For example, subinterpreters already share
``frozenset`` objects, and there are plans to share ``frozendict`` objects as
well.

Immutable container displays have been requested and discussed by the
community several times, most recently in the `frozenset and frozendict
comprehensions
<https://discuss.python.org/t/frozenset-and-frozendict-comprehensions/101584>`__
thread on Discourse.


Rationale
=========

Syntax, not a builtin call
--------------------------

Only syntax gives the compiler a semantic guarantee. A call to
``frozenset(...)`` can be shadowed, but a frozen display cannot. Every
optimization described below follows from this single property.

Static analysis benefits in the same way. Today, tools
that don't perform semantic analysis must assume
that ``frozenset(...)`` refers to the builtin. A frozen display turns
that assumption into a syntactic guarantee, so analyzers can treat the
result as immutable with full confidence. This holds even for purely
syntactic tools that perform no name resolution.

Linters and formatters can automatically rewrite ``frozenset({1, 2, 3})``
and ``frozendict({1: 2})`` to be ``f{1, 2, 3}`` and ``f{1: 2}``
on newer Python versions.

Why ``f{...}``
--------------

The ``f`` prefix reads as *frozen*, mirroring the familiar f-string
prefix convention. Sharing the letter with f-strings is not a problem:
strings are immutable too, so either way an ``f`` prefixed expression
evaluates to an immutable value. ``f{`` is a syntax error in all
current Python versions, so the syntax is fully backward compatible. The tokenizer
emits a single ``FLBRACE`` token for ``f{``, so ``f {1}`` (with a space)
remains an error and there is no ambiguity with the name ``f`` or with
f-strings.


Specification
=============

Grammar
-------

Our goal is to make new syntax and grammar identical
to existing ``set`` and ``dict`` syntax and grammar rules.

New alternatives are added to ``atom``, mirroring ``set`` and ``dict``
displays and comprehensions::

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
displays and comprehensions::
displays and comprehensions:
.. code-block:: peg


fset: FLBRACE star_named_expressions '}'
fsetcomp: FLBRACE star_named_expression for_if_clauses '}'
fdict: FLBRACE [double_starred_kvpairs] '}'
fdictcomp: FLBRACE kvpair for_if_clauses '}'

* ``f{1, 2, 3}`` is a frozenset display.
* ``f{'a': 1, 'b': 2}`` is a frozendict display.
* ``f{}`` is an empty frozendict, mirroring ``{}``.
* Star unpacking follows the existing displays: ``f{*xs}`` is a
frozenset display (like ``{*xs}``) and ``f{**d}`` is a frozendict
display (like ``{**d}``).
* Comprehensions are supported: ``f{x for x in xs}`` is a frozenset
comprehension and ``f{k: v for k, v in items}`` is a frozendict
comprehension.
* Async comprehensions are also supported
in async contexts: ``f{x async for arange(5)}``
is a frozenset async comprehension
and ``f{k: v assync for k, v in items}``

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
and ``f{k: v assync for k, v in items}``
and ``f{k: v async for k, v in items}``

is a frozendict async comprehension.
* :pep:`798` and unpacking in comprehensions is also supported.
``f{*nums for nums in list_of_nums}`` is a frozenset
compehension with unpacking and ``f{**items for nums in list_of_items}``
is a frozendict comprehension with unpacking.

AST
---

Four new expression nodes are added: ``FrozenSet(elts)``,
``FrozenDict(keys, values)``, ``FrozenSetComp(elt, generators)``, and
``FrozenDictComp(key, value, generators)``, structurally identical to
their mutable counterparts. Distinct nodes (rather than a flag) let
every downstream
consumer (e.g. the symbol table, the AST optimizer, the code generator,
and third-party tools) dispatch on immutability directly.

Semantics
---------

A frozenset display evaluates to exactly what ``frozenset({...})``
returns. A frozendict display evaluates to exactly what
``frozendict({...})`` returns. Both result types are immutable and
hashable, which is what makes the compile-time treatment below sound.

Bytecode
--------

Two new instructions are added:

* ``BUILD_FROZENSET (count)`` works like ``BUILD_SET``, but the freshly
created, uniquely referenced set is frozen in place with no copy.
* ``BUILD_FROZENMAP (count)`` works like ``BUILD_MAP``, but creates a
``frozendict``.

``count`` is an ordinary oparg with the same format and meaning as in
the existing ``BUILD_SET`` and ``BUILD_MAP`` instructions.

Displays that use star-unpacking or exceed the stack-use guideline fall
back to building the mutable container and freezing it in place. The
result is indistinguishable. Comprehensions take the same path, so
they need no new opcodes.


The optimization pipeline
=========================

The central claim of this PEP is that frozen displays are not merely
convenient syntax: they give every stage of the compiler a guarantee it
can act on. The reference implementation already exercises the full
pipeline:

1. **AST preprocessing.** ``FrozenSet`` and ``FrozenDict`` participate
in AST-level constant folding of their elements.

2. **Code generation.** The common case compiles to a single
``BUILD_FROZENSET`` / ``BUILD_FROZENDICT`` instruction with no name
lookup, no temporary copy, and an exact, statically known result type
(used by the compiler's type inference, e.g. to reject
``f{1, 2}[0]`` at compile time).

3. **Control flow graph (CFG) constant folding.** A display whose
keys and values are all constants is folded into a single
``LOAD_CONST``, serialized into the ``.pyc`` by marshal, and shared
across all executions: zero per-execution construction cost. Unlike
the existing list/set folds, this is *unconditionally* valid, since
immutability comes from the language semantics, not from how the
value is used. A display with a non-constant element, e.g.
``f{'key': ['list']}``, is still built at runtime.

4. **Constant deduplication.** Frozen constants participate in
``co_consts`` deduplication. For a frozendict the deduplication key
keeps the insertion order, so a display never loses its iteration
order to an equal display with a different key order.

.. note::

This PEP deliberately makes no claims about JIT-level optimization:
the JIT project is currently on hold following the `Steering
Council's announcement
<https://discuss.python.org/t/an-announcement-from-the-steering-council-regarding-the-jit-project/107638>`__.

The pipeline also opens future work that mutable displays can never
support: sharing folded frozen constants across code objects and
immortalizing them under free threading.


Backwards Compatibility
=======================

``f{`` is a syntax error today, so no existing code changes meaning.
The changes visible to tooling are: a new ``FLBRACE`` token, four new
AST node types, two new opcodes, and a bytecode magic number bump.


How to Teach This
=================

"Prefix a set or dict display with ``f`` to make it frozen".
Style guidance: prefer ``f{...}`` over
``frozenset({...})`` for literal values on Python 3.16+.
Constant frozen displays are free after the first execution.


Impact on the Standard Library
==============================

A quick survey of the standard library (excluding tests) finds about
105 ``frozenset(...)`` and 65 ``frozendict(...)`` call sites, of which
about 46 and 22 respectively pass a literal display and could be
written as ``f{...}``. They spread across widely used modules such as
``typing``, ``dataclasses``, ``functools``, ``copy``, and
``traceback``.

These numbers are only an estimate of the potential effect. This PEP
does not propose a mechanical rewrite of the standard library.


Reference Implementation
========================

A complete implementation, including the parser, AST, code generator,
and CFG constant folding, is available in the `fset_fdict branch
<https://github.com/corona10/cpython/tree/fset_fdict>`__ of the author's
CPython fork.


Rejected Ideas
==============

Alternative spellings
---------------------

Many spellings were considered. ``f`` was chosen simply because it is
the prefix that best evokes *frozen*:

* Single letter prefixes: ``i{'key': 1}`` (immutable), ``z{'key': 1}``.
This was rejected because types are called ``frozen``,
``f`` as a prefix reads the best.
* Multi letter prefixes: ``fr{'key': 1}``, ``fz{'key': 1}``,
``frz{'key': 1}``. This was rejected because it just adds an extra letter
to write and read with no extra real value.
* Symbol prefixes: ``${'key': 1}``, ``+{'key': 1}``.
This was rejected because most symbols already have a meaning as operators.
We can't reuse them for this new purpose.
We also don't want to add new symbols like ``$``
to keep them for something else in the future.

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I must confess I'm slightly surprised to see direct mention here about the risk of monopolizing symbols such as $ in case they might be of value in the future -- and yet no mention of using { itself in a context which was previously available and could have been used to good effect.

In particular since this PEP is all about adding constant folding opportunities for exactly two built-in functions -- just to make the functions tempting enough to make people more liable to use them -- the fact that the proposal locks down some syntax forever to mean this one thing, is something I really would expect to see justified.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@sobolevn We may need to revise this section. Thank you @eli-schwartz

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

And for context, an example of something the PEP could argue against -- the PEP I'd probably write, if I had the time / sponsorship -- would be to solve the problem of "builtins cannot be unambiguously referenced after being overwritten / reused as a kwarg, and even import builtins; builtins.int can't definitely get you one. Nor can type(1) or builtins.type(1), to say nothing of builtins that aren't for classes with dedicated syntax". And not that any of these are actually good ways to achieve said goal!

The obvious thing that springs to mind for using f{}, aside for "f-sets", is func{arg1} as a guaranteed builtin with no name lookups, which means we can reimplement this PEP as frozenset{ {'data'} }. The optimization opportunities are identical, but more extensive as now all other builtin functions are in scope.

(This is basically why I dislike the PEP itself -- it feels like "thinking small" / not very imaginative about pushing the boundaries of python.)

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@eli-schwartz this is not really a place for technical discusions, let's please move to https://discuss.python.org/t/pep-841-adding-frozen-syntax-to-make-immutable-types-optimizable/108219/32 for better visibility :)

* Bracket variants: ``{{'key': 1}}``, ``|{'key': 1}|``, ``{|'key': 1|}``.
This was rejected because adding
a single token ``f{`` is easier than adding two tokens.
Writing ``f{`` is also easier than writing two different brackets.
``{{}}`` is rejected because it is a valid syntax right now.
* Word prefixes: ``frozen{'key': 1}``, ``fdict{'key': 1}``,
``frozendict {'key': 1}``.
This was rejected because it is rather verbose.

We also rejected using ``F{`` as it is possible with fstrings.
This was rejected to keep the syntax as minimalistic as possible
and not to create extra ``F{`` token.

Freezing methods
----------------

Methods such as ``{'key': 1}.freeze()`` or
``{'key': 1}.take_frozendict()`` are not real alternatives: they can be
added independently of this PEP.

While such methods can be a great feature on its own,
making this the only way to create immutable containers is not an option:

* Multiline expressions with such methods are really hard to read,
because you need to read the very last line to know the type of the object.
* It is quite verbose to write for common cases.
* It does not provide syntax guarantees for static analysis tools.
* It may have a different semantics when used
as ``a = {1: 2}; b(a.take_frozenset())``,
dependending on `how the internals would look like <https://github.com/capi-workgroup/decisions/issues/109>`_,

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
dependending on `how the internals would look like <https://github.com/capi-workgroup/decisions/issues/109>`_,
depending on `how the internals would look like <https://github.com/capi-workgroup/decisions/issues/109>`_,

it might mean that ``a`` would be cleared.


Copyright
=========

This document is placed in the public domain or under the
CC0-1.0-Universal license, whichever is more permissive.
Loading